I think one of the problems is that economics education can be approached a few different ways
You can go the more technical route, focusing on modeling and econometrics. This prepares you for academia, the route most professors come from. It is good training for the mind, but does not leave you with a good intuitive feel for all the moving parts (and the human nature) that affects a real economy.
On the other hand you can teach using intuition, history, and logical arguments. This is what I see more from the Austrian side. Few modern economists are trained from this approach. This helps you develop a good logical intuition for economics, but doesn't really give you the technical know-how to do quantitative analysis, which is what a lot of economists get employed to do.
Ideally, a good economics education will give you preparation from both approaches. But this is hard to do in a limited time. Not to mention, few economics professors have real world business experience, so most are only equipped to approach it from the technical angle.
To make matters worse, it is hard for students to grasp econ at an intuitive level, because few of them have any real world decision making experience at that age. I consistently find that working adults are more interested and better able to grasp basic economics than college level econ students. So in a way, it's actually easier to teach econ students to just solve math problems than to have a real deep understanding of economics.
I teach undergraduate econ for a living and my background is definitely from the first side. But more and more I see the need to equip students with an intuitive feel and grasp of economics, beyond solving math problems. So I've been incorporating more high level discussion and analysis to my classes. It's still a challenge, because as I said, many students don't have much experience in economic decision making. But they definitely appreciate seeing how economic thinking applies to the real world and having it explained to them in more intuitive terms